Cases: Keep it Clean v. Flake: Intervenor / Amicus Filings

Legal Center & Reform Institute Amicus Brief

The Reform Institute and the Campaign Legal Center, two of the nation's leading campaign finance and election reform groups, filed a legal brief on August 3, 2004 in support of Arizona's clean elections system, which is under attack in the state's courts.

The case (Keep it Clean v. Flake) involves a challenge to the official analysis of a legislative proposal called Proposition 106 that has been distributed in a state election voter guide to every Arizona household that includes a registered voter. The purpose of Proposition 106 is to kill Arizona's Clean Elections program by eliminating the funding for the program and the Citizens Clean Elections Commission and to outlaw any future - even partial - public financing of candidates in Arizona.

Arizona law requires the state Legislative Council to provide voters with an "impartial analysis of the provisions of each ballot measure…[which] shall include a description of the measure and … be written in clear and concise terms avoiding technical terms wherever possible." (A.R.S. § 19-124(B).

The Institute and the Legal Center believe the current analysis of Proposition 106 violates Arizona law by offering a highly partisan analysis that fails to provide voters with accurate information about the far-reaching effects of Proposition 106, including the following:

• By de-funding the Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Proposition 106 would deprive voters of the voter guides that now give them critical information about both candidates and ballot measures in the primary and the general elections and make it impossible for the Commission to stage the candidate debates it is required to sponsor.

• By enshrining in the Arizona constitution a complete ban against using money collected by the state to subsidize candidate campaigns, Proposition 106 would forever limit citizens from adopting public funding - even when the money did not come from tax dollars.

• By prohibiting spending any money that receives special tax treatment on candidates, Proposition 106 would potentially bar individuals, political parties and other organizations from contributing money to state political candidates and making certain expenditures to influence state candidate campaigns.

In their brief, the Reform Institute and the Legal Center ask that the Court direct the Arizona Legislative Council and the Arizona Secretary of State to revise the description of Proposition 106, and provide the Court with a suggested ballot description that provides voters with an accurate, non-partisan analysis.

The Clean Elections program is a voluntary system that provides public financing for state and local candidates who qualify for funding and abide by spending limits. In a joint statement with Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano released July 9, 2004, the Reform Institute's Chair Senator John McCain said "Clean Elections has been an important step forward in the fight for campaign reform and transparency in Arizona government. Funded through volunteer donations and criminal fines, the program is increasing election competition and giving voters more choices at the polls."

The Citizens Clean Elections Act was approved by Arizona voters in 1998 and has served as a model for efforts to reform state election systems nationwide. The goal of public financing plans is to reduce the influence of large special interest political contributions by providing a public "match" of donations by real citizens. This helps less well-known candidates compete on a more level playing field with better-known, better-funded candidates, and allows all candidates to spend more time communicating with voters and less time gathering special interest money to fuel their campaigns.

Click here to view the amicus brief.

Click here to view a summary of the brief.